Jump to content


M46 Patton, M48 get more armor, ST 9.20


  • Please log in to reply
69 replies to this topic

ares354 #1 Posted 11 July 2017 - 02:39 PM

    Lieutenant Сolonel

  • Beta Tester
  • 73803 battles
  • 3,224
  • Member since:
    12-05-2010
Rip Centurions, [edited]your armor, Patton will have more and better soft stats coz reasons, and E50 MT, Heavy MT, [edited]him too, 185 is more then he need. 

https://thearmoredpa.../#comment-76629 - adding fake armor dont stop on AMX, now Pattons get more. And [edited]that those tank dont have this armor in life, [edited]that those tank where balance with soft stats to bad armor on turret, now they will have have both. Centurion X can GTFO. E50 same. 

And ofc some smarth [edited]will tell me that E50 has so much armor o hull, on upper plate btw. And turret is butter. 9.20 will be like Rubicon 10.0. 

JuliusCheddar #2 Posted 11 July 2017 - 02:47 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 29774 battles
  • 564
  • [3BPAN] 3BPAN
  • Member since:
    08-27-2014

Blah, blah, blah. E50m still has fantastic hull 

I guess I'm a smartass now

Btw why would E50m have turret armor it never had lol? Patton and centurion are hulldown tanks, e50s is not. 


Edited by JuliusCheddar, 11 July 2017 - 02:50 PM.


ares354 #3 Posted 11 July 2017 - 02:50 PM

    Lieutenant Сolonel

  • Beta Tester
  • 73803 battles
  • 3,224
  • Member since:
    12-05-2010

View PostJuliusCheddar, on 11 July 2017 - 02:47 PM, said:

Blah, blah, blah. E50m still has fantastic hull 

 

Fantastic hull, this 120 mm lower plate ? that is big or 185 flat turret front ? 

And ofc you don t have E50 or E50m, abut you talk how good armor he have ? 

Edited by ares354, 11 July 2017 - 02:50 PM.


Bucifel #4 Posted 11 July 2017 - 02:52 PM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 30989 battles
  • 1,373
  • [B4DD] B4DD
  • Member since:
    03-18-2013

what i told you,....WHAT I JUST TOLD YOU?

 

more weakpoints removal !

 

:facepalm:



Yakito #5 Posted 11 July 2017 - 02:52 PM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 18873 battles
  • 1,349
  • Member since:
    05-03-2011
Oh my god. It took me 5 attempts to read your topic and I still understand half of it. Why do you care that a paper tank gets a bit of armor?
Centurions will always be at the end of their buff list. And e50 is fine last time I played it. Got me my dog tag at tankfest and it was the first time I played with it.

JuliusCheddar #6 Posted 11 July 2017 - 02:53 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 29774 battles
  • 564
  • [3BPAN] 3BPAN
  • Member since:
    08-27-2014

View Postares354, on 11 July 2017 - 02:50 PM, said:

 

Fantastic hull, this 120 mm lower plate ? that is big or 185 flat turret front ? 

And ofc you don t have E50 or E50m, abut you talk how good armor he have ? 

And you obviously don't have a Patton



ExclamationMark #7 Posted 11 July 2017 - 02:53 PM

    Colonel

  • Player
  • 16775 battles
  • 3,727
  • Member since:
    04-12-2013
Padders rejoice! 

Gvozdika #8 Posted 11 July 2017 - 02:54 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 38155 battles
  • 550
  • Member since:
    02-26-2011
WG seem to be looking at each nation in turn - so hopefully the UK tree will get some positive attention as well in time (we can but hope).
 
I quite enjoy playing my M48 as it is - having a tougher turret with less of a glaring weak-spot is not something I'm going to complain about. After all, you have a fairly decent gun but the armour (prior to this proposed buff) isn't reliable against anything other than the odd T8 shooting AP at you. The mobility is still inferior to most T10 meds. 
 
The M46 was left behind a long time ago thanks to power-creep - so the turret buffs for it might make it a fair bit more competitive in the situations where it should shine (it's ideal for popping up and ridgeline-fighting - but the paper turret always let it down).


ares354 #9 Posted 11 July 2017 - 02:55 PM

    Lieutenant Сolonel

  • Beta Tester
  • 73803 battles
  • 3,224
  • Member since:
    12-05-2010

View PostYakito, on 11 July 2017 - 02:52 PM, said:

Oh my god. It took me 5 attempts to read your topic and I still understand half of it. Why do you care that a paper tank gets a bit of armor?
Centurions will always be at the end of their buff list. And e50 is fine last time I played it. Got me my dog tag at tankfest and it was the first time I played with it.

 

Omg, you dont get that WG is making same tanks. Now AMX 30 b have turret front 330 mm effective, Patton m48...Why ? For what ? 

Patton have one of the best soft stats on gun, he dont need to have 330 mm effective turret front!!! Why E50m has to have 185 mm ? Where is logic ? 

JuliusCheddar #10 Posted 11 July 2017 - 02:59 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 29774 battles
  • 564
  • [3BPAN] 3BPAN
  • Member since:
    08-27-2014

View Postares354, on 11 July 2017 - 02:55 PM, said:

 

Omg, you dont get that WG is making same tanks. Now AMX 30 b have turret front 330 mm effective, Patton m48...Why ? For what ? 

Patton have one of the best soft stats on gun, he dont need to have 330 mm effective turret front!!! Why E50m has to have 185 mm ? Where is logic ? 

Emm, because it has much better hull, goes 15 kph faster and, yuno, IS NOT A Edited HULLDOWN TANK? 

It also has better p2w ratio

Turret is much smaller

And has much better accuracy 


Edited by Asklepi0s, 11 July 2017 - 03:30 PM.
This post has been edited by the moderation team due to inappropriate remarks


ellua #11 Posted 11 July 2017 - 03:06 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 1160 battles
  • 555
  • Member since:
    09-29-2011

View Postares354, on 11 July 2017 - 01:55 PM, said:

 

Omg, you dont get that WG is making same tanks. Now AMX 30 b have turret front 330 mm effective, Patton m48...Why ? For what ? 

Patton have one of the best soft stats on gun, he dont need to have 330 mm effective turret front!!! Why E50m has to have 185 mm ? Where is logic ? 

 

Because QB said E50M is weak, and will stay...

Edited by ellua, 11 July 2017 - 03:07 PM.


ares354 #12 Posted 11 July 2017 - 03:07 PM

    Lieutenant Сolonel

  • Beta Tester
  • 73803 battles
  • 3,224
  • Member since:
    12-05-2010

View PostJuliusCheddar, on 11 July 2017 - 02:59 PM, said:

Emm, because it has much better hull, goes 15 kph faster and, yuno, IS NOT A Edited HULLDOWN TANK? 

It also has better p2w ratio

Turret is much smaller

And has much better accuracy 

 

M48 has much better dpm,
Much better view range,
Much better soft stats on gun, aim time, dispersion on move, on turret traverse. 
E50m has better top speed, but has worse ground resistance. 

E50m lose gunner every time he is hit in turret front, and heat wont care about this joke armor on turret of E50m. 

@Ellua

What QB has to do with this topic ? M48 got big buff not so long time ago, now he get yet again, and WG buff turret of M48 and Centurion X turret armor it pointless. British tank now have nothing over M48. 

Edited by Asklepi0s, 11 July 2017 - 03:31 PM.


Thalgardis #13 Posted 11 July 2017 - 03:18 PM

    Sergeant

  • Player
  • 19805 battles
  • 222
  • Member since:
    04-13-2012

View PostGvozdika, on 11 July 2017 - 02:54 PM, said:

WG seem to be looking at each nation in turn - so hopefully the UK tree will get some positive attention as well in time (we can but hope).
 
I quite enjoy playing my M48 as it is - having a tougher turret with less of a glaring weak-spot is not something I'm going to complain about. After all, you have a fairly decent gun but the armour (prior to this proposed buff) isn't reliable against anything other than the odd T8 shooting AP at you. The mobility is still inferior to most T10 meds.
 
The M46 was left behind a long time ago thanks to power-creep - so the turret buffs for it might make it a fair bit more competitive in the situations where it should shine (it's ideal for popping up and ridgeline-fighting - but the paper turret always let it down).

 

 

Actually the absence of armor on the M46 Patton, was never a problem to me, but the  dispersion combined with low penetration for standart ap. Too many shots "ding" or simply miss.  Okay maybe with the new turet armor you can sit at short to medium ridge lines, making dispersion and penetration less of a deal. Still a different "buff approach" had been better in my eyes instead of  "over armoring" each and every tank.



ares354 #14 Posted 11 July 2017 - 03:22 PM

    Lieutenant Сolonel

  • Beta Tester
  • 73803 battles
  • 3,224
  • Member since:
    12-05-2010

View PostThalgardis, on 11 July 2017 - 03:18 PM, said:

 

 

Actually the absence of armor on the M46 Patton, was never a problem to me, but the  dispersion combined with low penetration for standart ap. Too many shots "ding" or simply miss.  Okay maybe with the new turet armor you can sit at short to medium ridge lines, making dispersion and penetration less of a deal. Still a different "buff approach" had been better in my eyes instead of  "over armoring" each and every tank.

 

Not every tank need to have armor ? Now WG add armor to tank like Patton and AMX who never had too much armor, coz those tank dont needed armor. Why WG add so much fake armor, on tank that where build and never had that much armor ? To spam more premium ammo at them ?  

arthurwellsley #15 Posted 11 July 2017 - 03:22 PM

    Lieutenant Сolonel

  • Player
  • 51788 battles
  • 3,028
  • [-B-C-] -B-C-
  • Member since:
    05-11-2011

Second USA medium tree first.

 

WG need to put the M60A1 tree into the game before buffing M46 and M48 Pattons.



Bucifel #16 Posted 11 July 2017 - 03:26 PM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 30989 battles
  • 1,373
  • [B4DD] B4DD
  • Member since:
    03-18-2013

View Postares354, on 11 July 2017 - 03:22 PM, said:

 

Not every tank need to have armor ? Now WG add armor to tank like Patton and AMX who never had too much armor, coz those tank dont needed armor. Why WG add so much fake armor, on tank that where build and never had that much armor ? To spam more premium ammo at them ?  

 

of course because this...its something new or what?:facepalm:

of course because premium ammo

all those changes in armor are a prem. ammo effect...because it can negate them and you need more and more prem. account and tanks

 

:facepalm:


Edited by Bucifel, 11 July 2017 - 03:26 PM.


ExclamationMark #17 Posted 11 July 2017 - 03:30 PM

    Colonel

  • Player
  • 16775 battles
  • 3,727
  • Member since:
    04-12-2013

View Postarthurwellsley, on 11 July 2017 - 03:22 PM, said:

WG need to put the M60A1 tree into the game before buffing M46 and M48 Pattons.

 

Why?

Enforcer1975 #18 Posted 11 July 2017 - 03:31 PM

    Field Marshal

  • Player
  • 20760 battles
  • 10,865
  • [WJDE] WJDE
  • Member since:
    05-04-2014
So now they buff armor and firepower on everything above tier 8.....that tier is so f*cked now...when will they realize that reversing buffs / nerfing / adjusting is better in the long run? 

Edited by Enforcer1975, 11 July 2017 - 03:32 PM.


ares354 #19 Posted 11 July 2017 - 03:34 PM

    Lieutenant Сolonel

  • Beta Tester
  • 73803 battles
  • 3,224
  • Member since:
    12-05-2010

View PostBucifel, on 11 July 2017 - 03:26 PM, said:

 

of course because this...its something new or what?:facepalm:

of course because premium ammo

all those changes in armor are a prem. ammo effect...because it can negate them and you need more and more prem. account and tanks

 

:facepalm:

 

Well, what will happen is that when good player will see M48 coming, he will just load HEAT and derp him into turret and pen anyway. WG will get profit, and guess what. WG plan to nerf income on tier 10...

Edited by ares354, 11 July 2017 - 03:35 PM.


Enforcer1975 #20 Posted 11 July 2017 - 03:41 PM

    Field Marshal

  • Player
  • 20760 battles
  • 10,865
  • [WJDE] WJDE
  • Member since:
    05-04-2014

View Postares354, on 11 July 2017 - 03:34 PM, said:

 

Well, what will happen is that when good player will see M48 coming, he will just load HEAT and derp him into turret and pen anyway. WG will get profit, and guess what. WG plan to nerf income on tier 10...

Probably almost time to say good bye to this game and look for another one to spend my money on...






1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users